Are we sure Tyrod Taylor isn't the best (potential) option?

I wasn't making THE case for Taylor; I was disputing your claim that Brock Osweiler in Denver was better than Taylor in Buffalo. Care to actually defend that, given the numbers? Also:

When discussing QB, efficiency has nothing to do with their running the football.

The Bills were 14-14 in his starts; you're telling me - with Hopkins and this defense - that the Texans can't win 9-10 games with Tyrod Taylor, assuming he's the same QB here that he was in Buffalo? That's a stretch. And given that BOB has coaxed career years out of Fitzpatrick and Hoyer, it might also be a stretch to assume he wouldn't be better. (Granted, Osweiler throws a wet blanket on that idea, but...)

 

Stop it. He's a not a terrible QB; you do yourself no favors calling Tyrod Taylor "terrible." Average? I wouldn't argue. But he's not terrible. That's absurd. Give your heels a rest; I'm sure someone will mention Teddy Bridgewater soon enough and you can go to town on him.

The issue is that on March 11 of this year - in less than a month - that $15.5MM for 2018 - which, FYI, is not this upcoming season but the season after - is guaranteed. If, on March 12, he blows out both knees and is out for two years (ala Teddy B), he still gets paid. If he regresses again this year and proves to be below-average (or "terrible"), he still gets paid.

Don't be dense; you know the vast majority of NFL contracts are not guaranteed and the enormous flexibility that provides. THAT is the issue. It would be an issue for any team with virtually any QB, quality notwithstanding.

I know you know this; you look like a fool arguing otherwise.

 

+ 40 rushing yards, which comes to 255 yards/game - why are passing yards more valuable? And Taylor had a higher YPA and lower INT rate.

Tyrod Taylor would be an upgrade over 2016 Brock Osweiler; he averaged nearly 2 more yards per attempt and committed far fewer turnovers. Again, don't be dense.

A. 509/800 (64%); 6,475 (8.1 YPA); 52/19; 100.6 (+ 1,028 rushing yards; 5 TDs); ages 24-25
B. 511/816 (63%); 6,058 (7.4 YPA); 37/12; 94.2 (+ 1,148 rushing yards; 10 TDs); ages 26-27

B., of course, is Taylor. Care to guess who A. is?

 

At that rate, yes, you would. Again, he's guaranteed $15.5MM no matter what happens in 2017. You have no out if Taylor gets hurt or regresses to the point of a being burden.

In 2015, he finished 5th in YPA: 8th in QB rating. As mentioned, he regressed in 2016 (21st and 18th) - but was also reportedly playing with an injury that eventually required surgery.

I'm going to type...... very...... slowly......: it has nothing to do with 2017. If, in 17 days, he's on their roster with his current contract, his 2018 salary is guaranteed. Are you so dug in here that you can't understand the ramifications of that and why few, if any teams, would lock into that kind of inflexible deal?

I mean, you're not stupid... wait - are you? Maybe you are...... Tell ya what, find me another QB who's salary the year after this is guaranteed. Not, like, rookie deal QB. Give me an established veteran who's (nearly) full year salary in 2018 is already locked in. Go on............ let's hear it.......

 

I did some of the heavy lifting for you...

As of March 11, 2017:
Matt Ryan is guaranteed exactly $2.4MM in 2018.
Aaron Rodgers is guaranteed exactly $.5MM in 2018.
Tom Brady is guaranteed exactly $0.00MM in 2018.
Drew Brees is guaranteed exactly $0.00MM in 2018.
Ben Roethlisberger is guaranteed exactly $0.00MM in 2018.
Russell Wilson is guaranteed exactly $0.00MM in 2018.

The Bills? In 17 days, they're going to owe Tyrod Taylor $15.25MM regardless of what happens in 2017. It's a remarkably stupid contract, given out by a remarkably stupid franchise that they are now (rightly) desperate to course-correct; likely because they figured out they're about to lock-in a QB for $13MM more than the six best QBs in football combined for the season after this one.

I don't care if Taylor is good, average or bad... NFL teams don't guarantee salaries two years out. THAT is why he might not be a Bill next year. Period.

 

You misspelled white.

 

Those are (mostly) SIGNING BONUSES, Bobby; teams pay those up front and then, for cap purposes, spread the amount out over several years. That is not the same thing as guaranteeing his salary. Taylor already received his signing bonus (~$3.5MM).

Having said that, I read the details of his contract wrong and while it's still a dumb contract, it does narrow the gap a bit... On March 11, an option bonus kicks in that pays $15.5MM *and* guarantees his 2017 salary ($12MM) (I originally read that $12MM as his '18 salary; it's '17.) In addition, it also guarantees $3.25MM of his 2018 salary. That means, regardless of what happens between March 11 and the start of the season, they must pay him $30.75MM. If one of his legs literally falls off on March 12... he's still getting a check for $30.75MM.

While we can argue where on the scale Taylor sits, in terms of quality - I think we both agree that guaranteeing him $30.75MM is not commiserate with his performance. However, it still remains that money is the issue... not talent, in terms of the Bills possibly moving on. They want a new contract.